From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: format.el Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 08:44:57 +0300 (IDT) Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <200204071850.g37Ioeo19892@aztec.santafe.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1018246741 22597 127.0.0.1 (8 Apr 2002 06:19:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 06:19:01 +0000 (UTC) Cc: handa@etl.go.jp, emacs-devel@gnu.org, gerd@gnu.org Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16uSUX-0005sE-00 for ; Mon, 08 Apr 2002 08:19:01 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16uSim-0003Ep-00 for ; Mon, 08 Apr 2002 08:33:45 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16uRdh-0008LP-00; Mon, 08 Apr 2002 01:24:25 -0400 Original-Received: from is.elta.co.il ([199.203.121.2]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16uR2k-0006Ml-00; Mon, 08 Apr 2002 00:46:14 -0400 Original-Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA28136; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 08:44:57 +0300 (IDT) X-Sender: eliz@is Original-To: Richard Stallman In-Reply-To: <200204071850.g37Ioeo19892@aztec.santafe.edu> Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:2461 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:2461 On Sun, 7 Apr 2002, Richard Stallman wrote: > AFAICS, the conversions that use `recode' can be rewritten to use > Emacs facilities based on Mule. However, someone will have to write > more-or-less trivial wrappers for encode-coding-region and friends, > since we don't currently support encoding with names `ibm-pc', > `roman8', and iso646-ge. > > Is this assuming we are trying to maintain precise compatibility? Yes.